The Imposter Analysis
The imposter is a 2012 British-American documentary directed by Bart Layton about the disappearance of Nicholas Barclay in 1997. The case involves Frederic Bourdin, a 23 year old male that impersonates the 16 year old Nicholas who was missing for over 3 years without a trace. The documentary gives explicit details, evidence, and interviews with individuals involved in the case. The director Bart Layton throughout the documentary presents a story far fetched to be true of the disappearance. The most important pieces to the outcome of the documentary are that the film is divided between reality and fiction, the way that Layton uses Frederic Bourdin in the film to persuade the audience, and Layton’s point of view is questionable of being bias.
…show more content…
At the beginning of the film, Bourdin is portrait as an unwanted kid hated by parents and grandparents and that he wanted to be loved by a real family. Layton gives a little back story of Bourdin so that this could increase the reason of why he would steal another person’s identity but it also raises the credibility of the director and Bourdin himself. It was definitely a smart move of Layton to share Bourdin’s life so that the audience could feel sorry for him and believe the story even more because in most criminal documentaries, the criminal will not directly participate in the film. The director usually uses interviews of other people who knew him or police reports. Bourdin’s participation was essential for the credibility of the film; he connects with the audience, he was calm, and open which made the audience believe his …show more content…
Layton documentary is somewhat bias in the sense that it accuses the family of being involved in the disappearance with many facts and claims from many individuals. Layton begins his documentary by giving an introduction to the disappearance of Nicholas; he interviewed policemen, private investigators, FBI agents, and neighbors. However, all these interviews are against the family. Layton reinforced his claim by not showing testimonies in favor of the family and even though he did not present any reliable proof of the family killing Nicholas, the audience can perceive that is the message he is trying to put across. Layton said, “It was a slow process: one family member agreed and then another: “They realised the interviews I was doing were very detailed, but they weren’t aggressive.” The interviews were very well done and the audience could definitely empathized with the family but Layton could have given more credibility to the family by presenting testimonies on their behalf and not putting Bourdin as such a victim. Layton chose to put it that way so that it would be a much interesting story making the audience believe the word of an identity thief rather than a grieving
At the beginning of the film, Bourdin is portrait as an unwanted kid hated by parents and grandparents and that he wanted to be loved by a real family. Layton gives a little back story of Bourdin so that this could increase the reason of why he would steal another person’s identity but it also raises the credibility of the director and Bourdin himself. It was definitely a smart move of Layton to share Bourdin’s life so that the audience could feel sorry for him and believe the story even more because in most criminal documentaries, the criminal will not directly participate in the film. The director usually uses interviews of other people who knew him or police reports. Bourdin’s participation was essential for the credibility of the film; he connects with the audience, he was calm, and open which made the audience believe his …show more content…
Layton documentary is somewhat bias in the sense that it accuses the family of being involved in the disappearance with many facts and claims from many individuals. Layton begins his documentary by giving an introduction to the disappearance of Nicholas; he interviewed policemen, private investigators, FBI agents, and neighbors. However, all these interviews are against the family. Layton reinforced his claim by not showing testimonies in favor of the family and even though he did not present any reliable proof of the family killing Nicholas, the audience can perceive that is the message he is trying to put across. Layton said, “It was a slow process: one family member agreed and then another: “They realised the interviews I was doing were very detailed, but they weren’t aggressive.” The interviews were very well done and the audience could definitely empathized with the family but Layton could have given more credibility to the family by presenting testimonies on their behalf and not putting Bourdin as such a victim. Layton chose to put it that way so that it would be a much interesting story making the audience believe the word of an identity thief rather than a grieving